Journal of Polymers and the Environment

, Volume 21, Issue 1, pp 30–38 | Cite as

Effects of Wood Fiber and Microclay on the Performance of Soy Based Polyurethane Foams

  • Ruijun GuEmail author
  • Mohini M. Sain
Original Paper


Various polyurethane (PU) foams were prepared by in situ reaction of isocyanate and soy-based polyol. The effects of wood fiber and microclay on the foam morphologies, mechanical properties and thermal behaviors of PU foams were investigated. NCO index had fundamental impacts on the influences of wood fiber and microclay on the performance of PU foams. The reinforcement behavior of flexible foams was different to that of both semi-rigid and rigid foams. Both fiber and microclay improved the compressive strength at a high NCO index of 140–250, and contributed to relative high decomposition temperatures. Unlike the compressive strength, the tensile strength was decreased due to the amount of hard polyurea formation from secondary reactions at the highest NCO level. In addition, wood fiber had different reinforcement mechanism from microclay. Wood fiber desired to form chemical bonds during foaming while microclay had potential to form physical insertions. This difference was expressed by the change of their thermal degradation temperature.


Microclay Soybean oil Soy-based polyol Polyurethane foam Wood fiber 



The authors are grateful to the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) and Ontario BioCar Initiative for their financial support. The authors also thank Huntsman, Urethane Soy Systems, and Air Products for their generous donations.


  1. 1.
    Anon (2010) A survey of recent chemical price trends: the potential impact of rising petrochemical prices on soy use for industrial application. Omni Tech International, LtdGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sherman LM (2007) Polyurethanes bio-based materials capture attention. Plastics Technology. Issued on 1 December 2007Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pollack JW (2004) Soy vs. Petro Polyols, a life cycle comparison. GPEC 2004 paper #37. Omni Tech International, LtdGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sleeckx J (2006) Foams from bio-based resources future perspectives. European conference on biorefinery research. Helsinki, Finland. 19–20 October 2006Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Allen T (2009) Going green: building a greener industry with soy. Construction Executive, July 2009Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Petrović ZS, Zhang W, Javni I (2005) Structure and properties of polyurethanes prepared from triglyceride polyols by ozonolysis. Biomacromolecules 6:713–719CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gu R, Konar S, Sain MM (2012) Preparation and characterization of sustainable polyurethane foams from soybean oils. J Am Oil Chem Soc. doi: 10.1007/s11746-012-2109-8
  8. 8.
    Petrovic Z, Javni I, Guo A, Zhang W (2002) Method of making natural oil-based polyols and polyurethane therefrom. US Patent 6,433,121. Issued on 13 August 2002Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hou CT (1995) Microbial oxidation of unsaturated fatty acids. Adv Appl Microbiol 41:1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rials TG, Wolcott MP, Nassar JM (2001) Interfacial contributions in lignocellulosic fiber-reinforced polyurethane composites. J Appl Polym Sci 80:546–555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gu R, Sain M, Konar S (2013) A feasibility study of polyurethane composite foam with added hardwood pulp. Ind Crops Prod 42:273–279. doi: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2012.06.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gu R, Khazabi M, Sain M (2011) Fiber reinforced soy-based polyurethane spray foam insulation. Part 2: thermal and mechanical properties. BioResources 6:3775–3790Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Khazabi M, Gu R, Sain M (2011) Fiber reinforced soy-based polyurethane spray foam insulation. Part 1: cell morphologies. BioResources 6:3757–3774Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Silva MC, Takahashi JA, Chaussy D, Belgacem MN, Silva GG (2010) Composites of rigid polyurethane foam and cellulose fiber residue. J Appl Polym Sci 117:3665–3672Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Urbanczyk L, Calberg C, Detrembleur C, Jérôme C, Alexandre M (2010) Batch foaming of SAN/clay nanocomposites with scCO2: a very tunable way of controlling the cellular morphology. Polymer 51:3520–3531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lee YH, Wang KH, Park CB, Sain M (2006) Effects of clay dispersion on the foam morphology of LDPE/clay nanocomposites. J Appl Polym Sci 103:2129–2134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rodrigue D, Souici S, Twite-Kabamba E (2006) Effect of wood powder on polymer foam nucleation. J Vinyl Add Tech 12:19–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Banik I, Sain MM (2008) Role of refined paper fiber on structure of water blown soy polyol based polyurethane foams. J Reinf Plast Compos 27:1515–1524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Banik I, Sain MM (2010) Nanoclay modified water-blown polyurethane foams derived from bifunctional soybean oil-based polyol. Polym Plast Technol Eng 49:701–706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lee CL, Homan GR (1982) Urethane modified silicone foam. J Cell Plast 18:233–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ellis WD, Rowell RM (1984) Reaction of isocyanates with southern pine wood to improve dimensional stability and delay resistance. Wood Fiber Sci 16:349–356Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Karmarkar A, Chauhan SS, Modak JM, Chanda M (2007) Mechanical properties of wood–fiber reinforced polypropylene composites: effect of a novel compatibilizer with isocyanate functional group. Compos A Appl Sci Manuf 38:227–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rowell RM, Ellis WD (1981) Chapter 19: bonding of Isocyanates to wood. Urethane chemistry and applications. Edwards KN et al (eds) ACS symposium series, vol 172. American Chemistry Society. Washington, pp 263–284Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Stirna U, Sevastyanova I, Misane M, Cabulis U, Beverte I (2006) Structure and properties of polyurethane foams obtained from rapeseed oil polyols. Proc Estonian Acad Sci Chem 55:101–110Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Harikrishnan G, Patro TU, Khakhar DV (2006) Polyurethane foam–clay nanocomposites: nanoclays as cell openers. Ind Eng Chem Res 45:7126–7134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bledzki AK, Faruk O (2006) Microcellular injection molded wood fiber–PP composites: Part II—effect of wood fiber length and content on cell morphology and physico-mechanical properties. J Cell Plast 42:77–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Pegoretti A, Dorigato A, Penati A (2007) Tensile mechanical response of polyethylene—clay nanocomposites. eEXPRESS Polym Lett 1:123–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Javni I, Zhang W, Karajkov V, Petrovic ZS, Divjakovic V (2002) Effect of nano-and micro-silica fillers on polyurethane foam properties. J Cell Plast 38:229–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Dai Z, Hatano B, Kadokawa J, Tagaya H (2002) Effect of diaminotoluene on the decomposition of polyurethane foam waste in superheated water. Polym Degrad Stab 76:179–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wlodarczak D (1988) Studies of temperature and atmosphere composition influence on thermal degradation products of polyurethane foam. J Appl Polym Sci 36:377–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lemmon EW, Jacobsen RT (2004) Viscosity and thermal conductivity equations for nitrogen, oxygen, argon, and air. Int J Thermophys 25:21–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lee CS, Ooi TI, Chuah CH, Ahmad S (2007) Rigid polyurethane foam production from palm oil-based epoxidized diethanolamides. J Am Oil Chem Soc 84:1161–1167CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Biocomposites and Biomaterials Processing, Faculty of ForestryUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations